Indian Antiquary Vol 61

Author(s): Richard Carnac Temple, Charles E A W Oldham, S Krishnaswami Aiyangar, Devadatta Ramkrishna Bhandarka
Publisher: Swati Publications

Page 138

124
THE INDIAN ANTIQUARY
The Tirthikas are mentioned as offering tarpana in water.32 In the Chu-li-ya country, where the naked were numerous, the people, who were of a fierce and profligate character, were believers in the Tîrthikas.33 It follows that Titthiya, or Tîrthika, was a general desig. nation used by Buddhists for ascetics or sects who were heretics from the Buddhist point of view.
Mr. Jain's misapplication of the Buddhist texts is evidently due to his misinterpretation of the term Nigrantha as used therein. According to Prof. Jacobi34 this term originally signified the pre-Buddhistic Jain monks, who, as we have seen, were not accustomed to nudity. Their doctrines were the Chaturyama-dharma alluded to in the Sâmaññaphala-Sutta,35 in Silanka's commentary on the Achâranga-Sutta and in the text of the Bhagavatî; but Mahâvîra propounded the Panchayama-dharma, while the Buddhists persisted in calling him Nigantha. As applied to Mahavira the term connoted one who had destroyed the grantha, the bonds' of worldly cares, and did not refer to his nudity.36 The Buddhist texts, however, do not use the designation for the Jains alone. It is true that Nigantha of the Natha clan is distinguished from Purana Kassapa, Makkhali Gosâla, Kachchâyana of the Pakhudha Tree, and Sañjaya Belatthiputta.37 But in the Divyavadana, a work dating later than 200 A.D.38 Purano Nirgrantho is mentioned.39 In the Mahavagga, 40 the disciples of Pûrana Kassapa are described as Nigantha ekasátaka, gihî odatavasaná acelakasávaka. Yuan Chwang mentions Nigranthas side by side with Digambaras at Pundravardhana.41 All these clearly indicate that the Buddhists used this term in a generic sense, denoting religious orders whom they regarded as heretical.
Thus it is clear that the quotation from the Mahavagga cited by Mr. K. P. Jain does not refer to Jain, but to non-Jain monks. But, for the sake of argument, even if we accept that it refers to Digambara Jain monks, the argument of Mr. Jain is hardly tenable. To prove that the Digambaras were the earlier sect of Jains and the Svetâmbaras a later one, it is not enough to show that certain naked Jain monks existed at a particular period of time. It must also be shown beyond doubt that all Jain monks at and up to that period were naked and clothes were never in use amongst them.
[ JULY, 1932
In my original note I stated that the ancient images of the Tirthankaras consecrated before the division in the church cannot properly be said to belong to any particular sect. But Mr. Jain asserts that at the time of the Hâthigumphâ inscription "only naked images were installed and were under the exclusive management of the Digambaras." I fail to understand how he has come to such a conclusion. There is not a single authority or text which goes to show that only naked images were installed at the time and that such images were under the exclusive control and management of the Digambara sect. But from the internal and external evidence available up till now, it is clear that the differentiation of the Svetâmbara and Digambara Jain images did not begin during the early centuries of the Christian era. According to Svetâmbara tradition the distinction between the images of the two sects dates only from the eighth century A.D.,2 when, as the result of disagreement over
32 Watters, On Yuan Chwang, I, pp. 320-21.
33 Ibid., II, p. 224.
34 I.A., vol. IX, pp. 158-63.
35 Grimblot, Sept Suttas Palis, p. 126; ibid., p. 160 ff.
36 I.A., vol. VIII, p. 313.
37 Dialogues of the Buddha, Pt. 2, S.B.B., vol. III, p. 166.
3 J. N. Farquhar, Outlines of Indian Religious Literature, p. 108.
39 Cowell & Neil, Divyávadána, p. 165.
40 Anguttara-Nikdya, Pt. III (=Mahávagga, LVII, 2), pp. 383-84.
41 Watters, On Yuan Chuang, vol. II, p. 184.
42 Upadesa-tarangint, Ratnamandira Cani, pp. 248-49.